The advantage of using the Heavy Armor/Heavy Weapons is that you don't end up with huge numbers for damage and defense on these larger targets. So, instead of having to give things like tanks a toughness of 36 (which means the weapons they fire now have to be scaled up to something like 12d6 for another tank to have a decent chance of killing it).

That is definitely part of it.

Cryonic wrote:

Also, IIRC, Heavy Weapons ignore non-Heavy armor. So a cannon will ignore even platemail worn by a knight, but won't ignore the armor of a castle wall.

Sorry, but nope. Heavy Weapons do not automatically ignore non-Heavy Armor. They may (most likely) have the AP to do so, but it is not automatic._________________Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

However, homebrewing up some vehicles, I have a basic tank pegged with a toughness of 36 (24). If a double-tapping 9mm hitting with a raise dealing its 3d6+1 damage can scratch that monstrosity, I'm giving the player a high-five.

Be prepared to give a lot of high fives (9mm is AP 1). I saw 3 30+ damage rolls in my session last night, and the PCs only dealt damage 14 times.

Shooting an M1 Abrams with a pistol shouldn't have a prayer of doing anything (unless you open up a maintenance port and start shooting the engine directly, bypassing the armor entirely). Heavy Armor exists to remove that prayer, without having to make heavy weapons / armored vehicles super-stupid- damaging / tough.

I think I found a rule that most people are unintentionally ignoring rather than blatantly ignoring:
"Small / Large / Huge": the rules state the penalties or bonuses to attack, and then in the next sentences state that it's relative, giving two examples:

Two elephants get no bonus against each other.
a pixie gets a +4 to attack an elephant, but the elephants have a -4 to attack the pixie.

All of the creature entries I see that list these only state that attackers get the bonus/penalty, no mention of the reverse. So maybe the rules themselves ignore that part of the rule?

I know when I've had Large creatures in combat, I give the bonus to attack them but haven't penalized their ability to attack back.

It takes a Depleted Uranium shot or Heavy Artillery to destroy an M1. That's about right though: both types are Heavy Weapons and have a very high AP value (Heavy Artillery usually has 40 to 60 AP with upwards of 6d12 damage using WWII stats and I don't know the stats for DU, but I would imagine a higher AP value with less damage than Heavy Artillery). If you ignore Heavy Armor rules, then you've got a problem because those numbers have to start getting even higher. While that's neat to do hundreds of points of damage, that's not really FFF. It's a lot easier to just use Heavy Armor and Heavy Weapons._________________"I had a whole bunch of advice for you but got ninja'd by newForumNewName. I'd just do what he says." -- 77IM

"While nFNN could be less of a jerk about how he says what he says, what he says is essentially correct." -- ValhallaGH

Like most of the other posts, we tend to be fast an loose with encumbrance, except for when it's really necessary.
"Wait...Bob, are you trying to swim with plate on?"
We do use bags, if not just for encumbrance then just for the fact that I' would want to know how you're carrying all the stuff you say you have.

Shield facing is something that we never use really.
" Are you in front of him? Ok, he gets the shield bonus then."

We use ranges somewhat fast and loose, but that stems from playing without minis, I believe._________________I'll be in my bunk.

Again, many of us are not IGNORING encumbrance - we are just being less formal - and perhaps a bit more generous - about it. I still use encumbrance - I just eyeball it rather than worrying about the exact accounting of it. I also impose minimum strength requirements for armor, so that Wizard of yours is still going to have to spread attribute points around if he wants a high enough strength to wear full plate (it's d10 for me) and still be able to carry anything else like gear or a weapon.

But I would call that a house rule, not "blatantly ignoring" the rule. I am speaking to the folks that said they just hand wave encumbrance.

I would go so far as to say that by doing that in other games they have denied themselves some grand old GM treats.
A favorite of mine was to have the PCs search out the lair of the goblins that have been pilfering the travelers on the road to a small frontier town.
When they finally defeat the goblins the discover their treasure horde...wait for it...about 50,000 copper pieces. Heh heh heh. In D&D 10 CN (coin) = 1 pound. So that treasure horde weighs in at 5000 lbs.

After they load up to the max and head for the money changer, that's when you set off the indiana jones style boulder trap, or have one of the goblins set fire to the lair, or even have them get ambushed by a competing band of NPCs on the way home. _________________"Games give you a chance to excel, and if you're playing in good company you don't even mind if you lose because you had the enjoyment of the company during the course of the game. "
~Gygax

NPC reaction table; usually put the emphasis on RPing in that department..._________________No longer a luddite... I have a blog... After losing settings, rules and more in PC wipe after wipe its now home to my swag of RPG homebrewing... http://theniconomicon.blogspot.com/

My apologies for obfuscating the issue by mentioning an Imperial Star Destroyer. Only the most gonzo of games would have an M1 Abrams and an Imperial Star Destroyer in the same setting. There is absolutely no need whatsoever for the two stats to have any relative relationship to each other.

newForumNewName wrote:

It takes a Depleted Uranium shot or Heavy Artillery to destroy an M1. That's about right though: both types are Heavy Weapons and have a very high AP value (Heavy Artillery usually has 40 to 60 AP with upwards of 6d12 damage using WWII stats and I don't know the stats for DU, but I would imagine a higher AP value with less damage than Heavy Artillery). If you ignore Heavy Armor rules, then you've got a problem because those numbers have to start getting even higher. While that's neat to do hundreds of points of damage, that's not really FFF. It's a lot easier to just use Heavy Armor and Heavy Weapons.

If a modern setting has an M1 Abrams at 100/74/29 (86/60/15), the odds of a hand-held weapon acing enough times to damage it is so rediculously low, what is the point of Heavy Armor/Weapons? The odds of an AK-47 dealing that much have to be something like 1 out of 1,000,000.

ValhallaGH wrote:

Yep. Because the base toughness is only 14.
Shoot it with a 5d10, AP 90, HW APDUDS (armor piercing, depleted uranium, discarding sabot) round and it will probably go boom to a mere 30 damage.

I'm still failing to understand what Heavy Weapons/Armor adds. Is it likely that someone at some point in the night will get some lucky aces and deal an incredible amount of damage with their small arms - absolutely. Is it likely that someone will get some lucky aces and deal an incredible amount of damage with their small arms when specifically rolling a damage roll against a tank - nope. It might happen once or even twice a campaign - and if so, it will sure make a memorable moment.

ValhallaGH wrote:

A PC can survive being shot for 30 damage (I've seen it; I've done it)..

If a modern setting has an M1 Abrams at 100/74/29 (86/60/15), the odds of a hand-held weapon acing enough times to damage it is so rediculously low, what is the point of Heavy Armor/Weapons? The odds of an AK-47 dealing that much have to be something like 1 out of 1,000,000.

Not everything with Heavy Armor is an M1 Abrams tank. An old sailing ship, for example, only has a toughness of 18 and 4 of that is armor. It has Heavy Armor because you can't hack it to bits with a rapier, no matter how good your damage roll.

Old One Eye wrote:

I'm still failing to understand what Heavy Weapons/Armor adds. Is it likely that someone at some point in the night will get some lucky aces and deal an incredible amount of damage with their small arms - absolutely. Is it likely that someone will get some lucky aces and deal an incredible amount of damage with their small arms when specifically rolling a damage roll against a tank - nope. It might happen once or even twice a campaign - and if so, it will sure make a memorable moment.

If you don't want to use it, that's fine. But if you want to understand the mechanic, I'll leave that to Clint. I have obviously failed to explain it already._________________"I had a whole bunch of advice for you but got ninja'd by newForumNewName. I'd just do what he says." -- 77IM

"While nFNN could be less of a jerk about how he says what he says, what he says is essentially correct." -- ValhallaGH

One advantage to Heavy Armor is if something has 30 armor, resolving each pistol/rifle shot at it would take ages. Heavy Armor is a Fast! way to just say, "No, you're not going to scratch it. Go get an appropriate weapon."

I don't mind the randomness, but personally I'd rather see it tied to Vigor or perhaps Strength and not d6 random for every character. I'm guessing a young athlete could run farther than a decrepit wizard..._________________Savaged Fallout homebrewLow Life and other stuff

I don't mind the randomness, but personally I'd rather see it tied to Vigor or perhaps Strength and not d6 random for every character. I'm guessing a young athlete could run farther than a decrepit wizard...

In this example that would be an athlete with Fleet-footed while the mage had a hindrance (forget the name). So the Athlete would have a larger running die vs the "decrepit" mage.

If a modern setting has an M1 Abrams at 100/74/29 (86/60/15), the odds of a hand-held weapon acing enough times to damage it is so rediculously low, what is the point of Heavy Armor/Weapons? The odds of an AK-47 dealing that much have to be something like 1 out of 1,000,000.

29 damage? That's pretty easy to get.
Even on 2d8+1+1d6, AP 2, (average 15) it's possible to ace a couple of dice and get 30+ damage. And hey, look, 31 AP 2 versus the bottom armor is all it takes to put a wound on an M1.
So now a volley of AK-47 fire can kill an M1 when it rolls over a hummock and exposes the belly. Or if the ballsy Ruskies hide in a spider-hole and shoot up as the tank rolls overhead. Or...

And most things with heavy armor are a lot less impressive. Bradley IFV? ~16/15/14 (4/3/2). Heavy armor is the only thing that gives it a hope of surviving AK fire. Ma Deuce will go through that pretty consistently (which is a reasonably fair assessment for a base Desert Storm model).

P.S. Official M1 stats do exist. The armor values are lower (60/41/12) but the base toughness is higher (17)_________________"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."

If a modern setting has an M1 Abrams at 100/74/29 (86/60/15), the odds of a hand-held weapon acing enough times to damage it is so rediculously low, what is the point of Heavy Armor/Weapons? The odds of an AK-47 dealing that much have to be something like 1 out of 1,000,000.

29 damage? That's pretty easy to get.
Even on 2d8+1+1d6, AP 2, (average 15) it's possible to ace a couple of dice and get 30+ damage. And hey, look, 31 AP 2 versus the bottom armor is all it takes to put a wound on an M1.
So now a volley of AK-47 fire can kill an M1 when it rolls over a hummock and exposes the belly. Or if the ballsy Ruskies hide in a spider-hole and shoot up as the tank rolls overhead.

FYI, that last number isn't bottom armor, it's Rear armor.

So the guy with the AK-47 simply walks behind the tank and opens fire. So not 1 in 1,000,000 but more like a 1 in 20 of taking out the tank with one shot. And of course, the AK-47 could actually fire up to 3 shots in one action, meaning the odds any one of them took out the tank would be more like 1 in 7. Takes on a different perspective to think our anti-tank force is 7 guys with AK-47s. Heck, if you want to go cheaper, give them double-barrel shotguns (4d6 damage on a raise) while it drops the chance of taking out the tank to 1 in 9, the +2 to Shooting actually increases the odds of success.

That said, it's about options other than huge amounts of Armor and equally huge amounts of AP. As noted, a galleon can have 4 points of Armor and Heavy Armor, which allows cannons to easier balance while retaining variance, but as noted prevents someone with a great axe and a Wild Attack from cutting the ship in twain._________________Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager

That said, it's about options other than huge amounts of Armor and equally huge amounts of AP. As noted, a galleon can have 4 points of Armor and Heavy Armor, which allows cannons to easier balance while retaining variance, but as noted prevents someone with a great axe and a Wild Attack from cutting the ship in twain.

Just to arrogantly chime in here. This last sentence really underlines the point if you consider super powers. The benefits from Heavy Weapons are most apparent in a supers game.

Normal man with a great axe hacking at a ship is doing nothing but getting it stuck in the hull.

The Hulk with a great axe (or not) turns it to splinters.

Likewise, a person with an Ak-47 can unload on the Hulk and do nothing but piss him off.

But a helicopter with a sidewinder missile, or .50 cal might do some damage...albeit briefly. _________________"Games give you a chance to excel, and if you're playing in good company you don't even mind if you lose because you had the enjoyment of the company during the course of the game. "
~Gygax

Come to think of it, I don't allow automatic standing from prone. But that was mostly because I'd glossed over that section of the rules. I think I'd still charge the character 2" of movement though.

Coming from 3.5, where standing up in melee will cause an AoO, the stand-for-free rule had me scratching my head at first. But in SW ... if you're attacked in melee, its happening during someone else's turn, so you can't charge the character anything to stand up - he's got no movement to spend. Either he stands for free, or he is obliged to stay prone.

I don't want to discourage the players from keeping their heads down, so we play this one as written.

One rule that we do ignore is shield-facing. Working it out / keeping track of it is not FFF - we gave this rule the flick from day one._________________Voodoo Heresy

Come to think of it, I don't allow automatic standing from prone. But that was mostly because I'd glossed over that section of the rules. I think I'd still charge the character 2" of movement though.

Coming from 3.5, where standing up in melee will cause an AoO, the stand-for-free rule had me scratching my head at first. But in SW ... if you're attacked in melee, its happening during someone else's turn, so you can't charge the character anything to stand up - he's got no movement to spend. Either he stands for free, or he is obliged to stay prone.

I don't want to discourage the players from keeping their heads down, so we play this one as written.

One rule that we do ignore is shield-facing. Working it out / keeping track of it is not FFF - we gave this rule the flick from day one.

My idea was to dock the characters normal "free" movement on their next turn. Dunno yet though._________________"I had a whole bunch of advice for you but got ninja'd by newForumNewName. I'd just do what he says." -- 77IM

"While nFNN could be less of a jerk about how he says what he says, what he says is essentially correct." -- ValhallaGH

If a modern setting has an M1 Abrams at 100/74/29 (86/60/15), the odds of a hand-held weapon acing enough times to damage it is so rediculously low, what is the point of Heavy Armor/Weapons? The odds of an AK-47 dealing that much have to be something like 1 out of 1,000,000.

29 damage? That's pretty easy to get.
Even on 2d8+1+1d6, AP 2, (average 15) it's possible to ace a couple of dice and get 30+ damage. And hey, look, 31 AP 2 versus the bottom armor is all it takes to put a wound on an M1.
So now a volley of AK-47 fire can kill an M1 when it rolls over a hummock and exposes the belly. Or if the ballsy Ruskies hide in a spider-hole and shoot up as the tank rolls overhead.

FYI, that last number isn't bottom armor, it's Rear armor.

So the guy with the AK-47 simply walks behind the tank and opens fire. So not 1 in 1,000,000 but more like a 1 in 20 of taking out the tank with one shot. And of course, the AK-47 could actually fire up to 3 shots in one action, meaning the odds any one of them took out the tank would be more like 1 in 7. Takes on a different perspective to think our anti-tank force is 7 guys with AK-47s. Heck, if you want to go cheaper, give them double-barrel shotguns (4d6 damage on a raise) while it drops the chance of taking out the tank to 1 in 9, the +2 to Shooting actually increases the odds of success.

Though in all honesty, I am only in the midst of my first ever Savage campaign, and completely gonzo at that wherein next Sunday's game will involve the PCs using their superpowers to save Flash Gordon from Deadboys and SAMAS of the Coalition States with the thought in my head of a future mission whereby the PCs will have to take Flash down because he is fracturing the Rebel Alliance in his gusto to immediately go against Darth Vader's Fourth Reich.

Hence, I am sure I have said WAY more on this point than I am qualified.

Clint wrote:

That said, it's about options other than huge amounts of Armor and equally huge amounts of AP. As noted, a galleon can have 4 points of Armor and Heavy Armor, which allows cannons to easier balance while retaining variance, but as noted prevents someone with a great axe and a Wild Attack from cutting the ship in twain.

Thinking of the next campaign being a serious one set during the 30 Years War with plenty of Carribean fare to boot. When that day comes, some thought will be put to my inclination that the galleon's toughness at first glance appears a bit easy for one single cannon ball to seriously damage or even sink, more or less a broadside. Probably be picking up PotSM for it, so it is premature for me to think anything at this point beyond reading up on the 17th century.